¥ 

1 

Un 

ion  Theological  Seminary 
New  York 

III 

A 

Symposiac 

on 

Martin  Luther 

BR 

326 

.U54 

S95 

1883 


■^^ 


\l'-^o-l^  '^ 


BR  326  .U54  S95  1883 
Union  Theological  Seminary 

(New  York,  N. Y. ) 
A  symposiac  on  Martin  Luther 


-=3og>— 


-<So&=- 


%f 


^: 


A.    SYMPOSI^C 


ON 


MARTIN   LUTHER 

BY  THE 

flrofessors  of  the  Inion  |  hfologlcat  ^minarg 


IN 


ISTE^V^    YOI^K. 


^^ 


&o»  =$og;:=~- 


j\.    SYMPOSIA^C 


ON 


MARTIN   LUTHER 


BY  THE 


jjrofessors  o{  the  |[nion  ||ltcological  ^emiimr}} 


IN 


NET\^    YOI^K. 


Held  in  the  Chapel  of  the  Seininary ^  Monday  Afternoon^ 
November  19th,  1883. 


Mm  %oxh, : 


PRINTING  HOUSE  OF   WM.  C.  MARTIN, 
No.  Ill  John  Street. 


PREFATORY  NOTE. 


The  following  hrief  jpajpers.,  read  hefore  the  stiidents 
and,  a  few  friends  of  the  Union  Theological  Seminary^ 
ai'e  now  ptiblished  hy  the  Directon^  of  the  Seminary.,  in 
the  hope  of  reaching  a  larger  audience  than  the  Chapel  of 
the  Institution  coidd  hold.  Each  of  the  seven  Professors 
spohe  from  the  stand-point  of  his  ovm.  department.  The 
eight  rruinutes  allowed  to  each  speaker^  though  somewhat 
exceeded  in  almost  evcTy  case.,  nevertheless  served  a  good 
purpose  in  suggesti/ng  the  greatest  ptossiMe  condensation  of 
material.  No  man  in  Modern  History  better  deserves.,  or  bet- 
ter rewards^  sucli  handling  than  the  '■^ many-sided''^  LUTHER. 


I. 

MARTIN  LUTHEK'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY. 


Church  History,  like  all  other  History,  has  both  multiplicity 
and  unity.  It  is  many  things ;  and  it  is  one  thing.  Its  forces 
and  events,  merely  chronicled,  seem  multitudinons,  diverse, 
belligerent,  and  bewildering.  Profoundly  apprehended,  these 
forces  and  events  are  the  working  out,  straight  on,  of  a  single 
purpose. 

Humanity  is,  of  course,  in  all  these  nineteen  centuries. 
Christ  also  is  in  them  all,  partially  in  each,  wholly  in  none, 
but  making  himself  felt  more  and  more  from  age  to  age. 

It  is  only  four  hundred  years  since  Martin  Luther  was 
born.  It  is  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three  years  since 
Christendom  began.  Many  hundreds  of  years,  probably,  are 
yet  to  come.  Christendom  is  only  vestibule  as  yet.  Who 
can  tell  us  what  the  edifice  will  be  ? 

Till  Luther  came,  Christendom  had  been  Pelasgic :  first 
Greek,  in  its  emphasis  of  doctrine ;  Roman  next,  in  its 
emphasis  of  discipline  :  both,  as  I  have  said,  Pelasgic.  Greek 
and  Roman,  diverse  enough  in  some  respects,  at  bottom  are 
much  alike.  Form  and  order  are  the  racial  instinct  and  ideal. 
Orthodoxy  was  Greek,  defining  faith  to  be  the  right  l)elief. 
Obedience  was  Roman.  And  for  fifteen  hundred  years  they 
divided  History  between  them.  The  old  heathen  Pelasgic 
State  conditioned  and  tutored  the  new  Christian  Pelasgic 
Church.  Creed  and  organism  ruled.  Individuality  was  re- 
volt. I  speak  of  the  Pelasgic  State,  not  forgetting  that 
Greece  was  Democratic,  and  Rome  at  last  Imperial.  But 
whether  many-headed  or  single -headed.  Democracy  or  Em- 
pire, the  State  was  intolerant  of  dissent  and  opposition.     The 


penalty  was  ostracism :  hy  ballot  on  one  side  of  the  Adriatic, 
by  edict  on  the  other. 

The  Pelasgic  State  was  bad  enough,  if  measured  l\y  our 
ideal ;  but  good  enough,  if  judged  of  by  the  materials  it  had 
to  work  upon.  For  the  crude  Orient,  for  crude  peoples  any- 
where, it  was  the  best  thing  possible.  Mankind  outgrew  it 
very  slowly.  I  know  nothing  in  History  more  impressive 
than  that  magnetic  name  of  the  "  Holy  Roman  Empire," 
which,  from  Charlemagne  to  Napoleon,  flung  its  gigantic 
shadow  across  the  map  of  Europe. 

Tlie  Pelasgic  Church  could  no  more  be  final  than  the 
Pelasgic  State.  Everything  in  this  world,  from  the  Sabbath 
down,  was  made  for  man.  Individuality  is  sacred,  and  must 
have  its  rights.  Hence  the  Teutonic  stadium  in  History ; 
and  Martin  Luther  as  the  inaugurator  of  it.  Of  its  cardinal 
principles  you  will  soon  be  told.  Call  it  what  you  will — 
Revolt,  Revolution,  or  Reformation,  it  was,  and  is,  the 
individual  believer  demanding  his  rights  of  the  Christian 
organism.  These  rights  had  been  withheld :  the  right  to 
interpret  Scripture ;  and  the  right  of  way  directly  to  Christ. 
And  the  retribution,  in  deteriorated  character,  had  been 
tremendous.  There  is  no  disputing  the  facts.  Europe  cer- 
tainly was  far  enough  above  its  old  Heathen  level ;  but  also 
shamefully  below  its  proper  Christian  level. 

All  through  the  flfteenth  century,  organic  Reformation 
was  agitated,  and  failed.  Pisa,  Constance,  and  Basle  were 
Pelasgic.  Expulsion  followed;  not  mere  exodus,  but  expul- 
sion. And  the  organism  gave  its  tinal  answer  at  Trent.  But 
Luther  was  already  dead,  dying  on  the  battletield  as  really 
at  Eisleben,  as  Zwingle  died  literally  at  Cappel.  And  it  was 
a  long  time  before  Protestantism  understood  itself,  if  it  does 
even  yet.  Its  manifold  beneflcent  achievements  are  indis- 
putal)le.  Its  historic  cojitributions  of  religious  and  civil 
liberty,  of  advanced  intelligence  and  morality,  of  eager  in- 
dustry, thrift,  and  accumulating  wealth,  are  like  the  jeonian 
geological  deposits.     Some  foolish  people   call    it  a  failure. 


Other  foolish  people  call  it  a  hnality.  It  is  neither  failure 
nor  finality ;  but  a  good  long  stride  onward  in  the  resounding 
march  of  these  Christian  centuries.  Even  the  old  Pelasgic 
organism  has  responded  to  its  quickening  touch.  All  Chris- 
tendom has  moved.  Should  the  Day  of  Judgment  dawn 
to-morrow,  Protestantism  would  go  to  the  right. 

It  is  childish  to  denounce  the  Protestant  sects.  They 
were  inevitable.  Sectarianism  is  the  real  iniirmity ;  and, 
along  with  that,  our  Protestant  scholasticism.  We  are  not 
yet  rid  of  the  heresy  of  an  interpreting  organism.  Our 
creeds  are  still  Pelasgic.  There  are  many  Popes  besides  the 
one  chosen  by  Roman  Cardinals.  The  sooner  we  are  con- 
sistent, the  better  it  will  be  for  us. 

What  next  ?  More  Protestantism,  not  less  of  it ;  but 
Protestantism  on  its  better,  positive,  productive,  and  progres- 
sive side.  Till  now  it  has  been  too  negative.  Sect  impeaches 
and  weakens  sect ;  connnunion,  communion ;  scholar,  scholar. 
Even  congregation  rivals  congregation.  This  Teutonic  dis- 
integration is  intolerable.  Unity  we  must  have  at  last ; 
though,  for  the  present,  we  may  be  content  with  intelligent, 
cordial,  steady  movement  towards  it,  in  our  simplified  Con- 
fessions. Creed-subscription  is  one  of  the  burning  questions 
of  the  hour.  There  are  two  kinds  of  subscrij^tion :  subscrip- 
tion to  the  letter,  and  subscription  to  the  spirit,  of  our  creeds. 
The  latter  must  eventually  carry  the  day.  It  is  both  more 
Scriptural  and  more  ratioual.  "  The  letter  killeth."  Strict 
literal  subscription  to  statements  of  Christian  doctrine  not 
Divinely  inspired,  should  never  be  required  of  any  one. 
Only  Scripture  is  imperative  and  iinal. 

Lift  up  your  eyes,  and  you  may  see  another  stadium 
advancing.  Its  aim  will  be  to  realize  the  Christianity  of 
Christ  himself,  which  is  about  to  renew  its  youth  by  taking 
to  heart  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  He  that  sitteth  on  the 
throne  is  saying :  "  Behold  I  make  all  things  new."  This 
earth  is  yet  to  be  redeemed,  soul  and  body,  with  all  its 
peoples,  occupations,  and  interests.     The  Iinal  goal  of  History 


is  not  merely  the  Day  of  Judgment,  rolling  its  thunders  from 
star  to  star  ;  but  a  sweet  and  blessed  Christian  civilization,  nay, 
a  true  Christian  socialism,  which  shall  answer  in  the  affirmative 
that  insolent  and  cruel  question  of  the  first  godless  Political 
Economist :  "•  Am  I  my  brother's  keeper  V 

Inspired  great  men  like  Wiclif  and  Luther,  sent,  at  wide 
intervals,  to  make  epochs  in  History,  are  equally  the  l^ene- 
diction,  and  the  reproach,  of  the  blinded  and  sluggish  masses 
requiring  such  guidance.  Let  us  hope  that  the  time  is  com- 
ing when  the  masses  themselves  shall  be  inspired. 

ROSWELL  D.  HITCHCOCK. 


II. 

LUTHER  A8  PROFESSOR  OF  THEOLOGY. 


In  the  lirovideiice  of  God,  the  light  of  divine  tnitli  hurst 
fortli  from  the  university  of  Wittenherg,  at  tlie  beginning  of 
the  sixteenth  century.  The  master  of  the  Reformation  was  a 
professor  of  theology,  who  was  training  his  students  in  the 
exegesis  of  the  Psalter  and  the  Pauline  Epistles.  He  first  gave 
the  word  from  God  to  his  own  pupils  ere  he  gave  it  to  the 
German  nation  and  the  world. 

The  university  of  Wittenberg  was  founded  by  Frederick 
the  Wise  of  Saxony,  in  1.502,  under  the  advice  of  Staupitz, 
chief  of  the  Augustinian  order  in  Germany,  who  became  its 
first  dean. 

Luther  was  born  in  the  heart  of  Germany,  at  Eisleben,  of 
sturdy  peasant  stock.  He  was  trained  at  the  Latin  school  of 
Eisenach,  by  the  help  of  Conrad  and  Ursula  Kotta.  His  father's 
improved  circumstances  enabled  him  to  study  in  the  faculty 
of  law  at  the  university  of  Erfurt,  the  best  German  university 
of  the  time.  Called  of  God,  he  entered  the  Augustinian  order 
and  came  under  the  influence  of  Staupitz.  Staupitz  taught 
him  that  Christ  was  the  centre  of  the  Bible  and  of  theology. 
Staupitz  became  his  spiritual  father,  and  induced  him  to  enter 
the  priesthood  in  iSOT,  to  become  j)rofessor  of  philosophy  in 
the  university  of  Wittenberg  in  1508,  and  doctor  of  theology 
in  1512.  Li  1513  he  began  to  lecture  on  the  Psalter,  and  in 
1515  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Luther  combined  in  his 
experience  and  faith  David  and  Paul,  but  the  Davidic  element 
predominated  in  his  life  and  character.  The  Psalms  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  .thus  expounded  in  the  lecture-room 
at  Wittenberg,  became  the  pillars  of  the  Reformation. 

If  the  Reformation  was  born  at  noontide,  Oct.  8 J,  1517 


10 

when  Luther  posted  the  ninety-live  theses  on  the  doors  of  the 
Castle  chnrch  at  Wittenberg  and  called  the  world  to  repen- 
tance, it  was  conceived  in  the  lecture-room  of  the  university 
when  he  expounded  the  penitential  psalms  to  his  classes,  and 
its  birth  was  heralded  when  his  expositions  issued  from  the 
press  in  the  spring  of  the  year. 

Luther,  as  a  professor  of  theology,  devoted  himself  to  the 
exposition  of  Scripture,  and  entirely  reformed  theological 
instruction  by  new  principles  and  new  methods. 

(1.)  The  scholastic  formula  was  "A  theologian  who  is  not 
logical  is  a  monstrous  heretic."  Luther  confronted  it  with 
''  That  is  monstrous  and  heretical  language."  The  scholastic 
logic  with  its  infinite  hair-splittings  and  never-ending  questions 
of  casuistry  had  become  supreme  in  the  universities.  It  was 
a  master-stroke  when  Luther  smote  it  with  its  own  audacious 
pretensions.  The  scholastics  sought  the  truth  by  analytic 
logic.  These  surgeons  of  learning  were  ever  dissecting  and 
reconstructing.  They  took  the  concrete  to  pieces ;  they 
defaced  its  beauty ;  they  destroyed  its  symmetry ;  they 
wounded  it  and  took  away  its  life ;  they  were  rewarded  with 
shapeless  and  bleeding  fragments,  and  bones.  The  bones  they 
reconstructed  into  skeleton  systems  ;  but  the  life,  the  glowing 
forrn,  the  beautiful  face  of  truth  had  departed. 

From  these  lecture-halls  of  dissection  and  death,  Luther 
led  his  pupils  into  lecture-halls  of  reality  and  life.  God  gave 
him  wondrous  insight  into  trutii,  and  marvellous  powers  of 
delineation.  The  concrete  was  substituted  for  the  abstract — 
the  intuitive  method  for  the  analytical  ;  and  enthusiastic  love 
of  the  truth  assumed  the  place  of  the  cold,  mechanical,  cruel 
handling  of  it.  The  words  of  Luther  became  words  of  life 
and  burning  light.  They  kindled  his  pupils ;  they  fired  the 
German  nation  ;  they  set  the  world  ablaze  with  a  new  era. 
The  university  of  Wittenl)erg  became  the  centre  of  Europe, 
and  its  professors  the  doctors  of  the  world. 

(2.)  The  mediaeval  exegesis  had  covered  over  the  Bil)le 
with  the  glosses  of  the  manifold  sense,  and  encased  it  in  the 


11 

decisions  of  the  councils  and  the  doctrines  of  the  fathers. 
The  Bible  was  hidden  in  the  mass  of  tradition.  Luther 
bravely  attacked  this  evil.  In  his  exposition  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer  on  the  first  Sunday  of  151Y,  he  declared  that  the 
scholastic  doctors  were  silly  dreamers  in  fooling  with  the 
fourfold  sense.  They  understood  neither  the  spirit  nor  the 
letter  of  Scrij)ture  ;  they  had  made  it  a  nose  of  wax. 

It  is  not  true  that  the  Bible  was  inaccessible  to  the  people 
in  the  fifteenth  century.  It  was  then,  as  now,  the  most 
accessible  of  books.  There  were  immense  numbers  of  MSS. 
of  the  Bible  in  the  libraries  of  the  universities  and  monas- 
teries and  in  private  hands.  The  Bible  was  the  earliest 
printed  book,  and  numerous  editions  of  the  Bible  in  many 
different  languages  poured  from  the  presses.  There  were 
several  German  versions  of  the  Bible  before  Luther.  The 
ninth  German  Bible  was  published  in  the  year  of  Luther's 
birth.  The  Bible  was  not  shut  off  by  any  physical  barriers. 
It  was  not  chained  by  fetters  of  iron.  But  the  Bible  was  left 
on  the  shelves,  as  an  honored  relic  of  ancient  times.  It  was 
regarded  as  an  antiquated  text-book.  Its  juice  was  boiled 
down  in  the  Creeds  ;  its  teachings  were  represented  in  better 
forms  in  the  fathers.  The  free  intrepretation  of  the  Bible 
was  the  source  of  every  heresy.  The  Bible  was  a  dangerous  book. 
The  Fathers  and  creeds  were  safer.  Why  go  to  the  Bible  and 
run  the  risk  of  heresy,  when  you  may  have  the  substance  of 
the  Bible  in  the  creeds  and  the  fathers  and  be  sure  of  your 
orthodoxy  ?  It  was  a  dreadful  risk  that  Luther  ran  when  he 
went  back  of  the  fathers  to  the  Bible,  and  through  the  Bible 
to  God.  Ecclesiastics  were  not  surprised  that  he  rejected  the 
authority  of  the  Church  and  became  a  heretic.  When  in  the 
university  of  Wittenberg,  he  taught  the  Bible  in  place  of 
Peter  Lombard  and  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  masters  of  the  sen- 
tences, heretics  multiplied  like  rats,  and  they  ran  all  over 
Germany  and  infested  all  Europe,  and  threatened  the  entire 
structure  of  the  papacy.  •  But  blessed  l)e  God,  that  Avliich  the 
papists   called  heresy  has  proved  a   reformation   from    God. 


12 

Luther  followed  the  apostles  and  prophets  in  preference  to  the 
fathers  and  the  schoolmen.  When  Jesus  Christ  became  his 
master  he  rejected  the  pope.  He  discarded  the  manifold  sense 
because  he  had  found  the  divine  sense.  He  rejected  the  deci- 
sions of  the  councils  because  he  bowed  before  the  decisions  of 
God.  He  went  back  of  the  fathers  to  the  Father  of  all  fathers. 
The  study  of  the  Bible  became  the  chief  study  in  the  univer- 
sity at  Wittenberg.  A  new  theology  was  born,  a  theology  of 
truth  and  life,  of  converting  grace,  and  of  sanctifying  power. 

(3.)  The  chief  merit  of  Luther  as  a  professor  was  in  his 
unflinclving  fidelity  to  truth.  He  was  not  so  great  a  scholar 
as  Melancthon ;  but  Melancthon  would  have  given  aw^ay  the 
reform  by  his  compromising  j)olicy,  if  Luther  had  not  held 
him  fast  to  the  truth.  Luther  was  not  so  keen  a  critic  as 
Carlstadt  or  Agricola ;  but  these  became  narrow  and  one- 
sided, conceited  and  fanatical,  and  Luther  could  not  restrain 
them  from  mischief-making.  He  was  not  a  politician  as 
Avere  Zwingli  and  Calvin.  He  did  not  seize  the  civil  or  the 
ecclesiastical  sword  to  battle  for  the  reform  or  to  purge  the 
church.  Zwingli  took  the  sword  to  perish  by  the  sword. 
Calvin  purged  Geneva  so  heroically  that  he  made  hypocrites 
and  pious  exiles.  Luther  wielded  the  sword  of  the  spirit.  He 
grasped  the  truth  with  all  his  strength,  and  made  it  a  part  of 
his  own  being.  The  truth  of  God  swayed  him  with  irresistible 
power.  He  was  not  controlled  by  half-truths  and  force  of 
circumstances.  Essential  and  '^rltal  truths  and  the  great 
unities  made  him  their  spokesman.  He  held  these  up  as 
the  truth  of  God,  to  guide  and  save  the  nations.  He  im- 
pressed them  so  deeply  upon  the  Germanic  world,  that  they 
characterize  the  modern  age,  and  will  never  be  effaced. 

When  truth  became  supreme  in  the  university  of  Witten- 
berg, in  the  lecture  -  room  of  Luther,  the  Pope  and  the 
monastic  orders,  the  empire  and  the  allied  kings,  had  to 
contend — not  with  Luther  and  his  students  —  but  with  a 
divine  force,  the  Eternal  Logos,  the  living  God. 

CHARLES  A.  BlilGGS. 


III. 

LUTHER  AS  AN  EXEGETE. 


In  October,  1512,  Luther  became  Licentiate  and  Doctor  of 
Divinity  at  Wittenberg.  He  annonnced  the  Scripture  as  the 
subject  of  his  University  lectures,  and  in  1513  began  them  by 
a  course  on  the  Psahns.  November  17th,  1545,  he  iinished  a 
series  of  lectures  on  Genesis — the  last  fresh  University  work 
he  did.  Three  months  later  he  was  dead.  For  thirty-two  or 
thirty-three  years  he  M^as  thus  publicly  engaged  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Bible.  His  public  life  as  exegete  was  longer 
than  his  life  as  a  pronounced  reformer. 

But,  indeed,  he  initiated  a  reform  in  exegetical  methods 
as  noteworthy  as  his  reform  in  Christian  doctrine  and  practice. 
For  nearly  ten  centuries  before  him — since  the  death  of  the 
last  great  patristic  expositors — exegesis  had  made  almost  no 
advance.  Many  of  the  theologians  of  the  middle  age  did  not 
study  the  Bible  very  much.  Their  theology  was  wrought  out 
by  the  a  priori  methods  of  logic,  instead  of  being  an  outgrow^th 
of  freshly  apprehended  Scriptural  truth.  If  it  would  not  be 
true  to  say  that  the  Bible  was  rejected,  it  was  certainly  given 
a  subordinate  place.  Men  went  to  it  either  to  find  arguments 
for  dogmas  already  held,  or  to  get  edifying  thoughts  for  the 
promotion  of  spiritual  life.  The  more  numerous  the  proofs 
of  a  cherished  doctrine,  the  more  particular  and  varied  the 
spiritual  suggestions  that  could  be  found  in  it,  the  better. 
The  idea  of  an  objective  revelation  preserved  in  writing,  and 
of  exegesis  as  the  science  whose  prime  object  it  is  to  simply 
understand  that  revelation,  and  make  it  understood,  hardly 
existed  at  all.  Still  less  was  there  a  general  belief  in  the 
indwelling,  vitalizing  power  of  God's  Spirit,  constantly  ])resent 


14 

in  His  Word.  Hence  the  Bible  became  of  remote  interest, 
and  wlien  it  was  studied  at  all  the  allegorical  sense  was  made 
to  overshadow  the  literal  ;  and  the  mystical,  the  historical. 
There  had  been,  indeed,  some  movements  toward  better  things, 
particularly  since  Nicolas  of  Lyra  (d.  1340),  but  a  new  era 
began  with  Luther.  Luther  found  only  faint  and  feeble  begin- 
nings of  a  true  exegetical  science  ;  he  left  an  exegetical  science, 
still  imperfect,  as  was  natural,  but  avowedly  based  on  evangel- 
ical and  critical  principles.  He  pointed  out  the  path  which 
the  student  of  the  Bible  ought  to  follow,  and  took  long  steps 
in  it  himself. 

His  equipment  in  technical  knowledge  would  now  be  called 
very  slender,  and  its  limitations  cramped  him  a  good  deal. 
He  had  l)egun  to  pick  up  Hebrew  at  Erfurt,  and  possessed 
a  Hebrew  lexicon  of  some  sort  there.  But  he  expounded  the 
Psalms  in  1513  from  the  Vulgate  version,  with  only  occasional 
references  to  the  original  ;  for  most  of  these  he  was  indebted 
to  Reuchlin.  Li  Greek  he  would  seem  to  have  been  even 
worse  off  at  tirst.  We  have  no  knowledge  that  he  studied  it 
in  Erfurt,  and  he  shunned  the  society  of  those  who  might 
have  taught  it  to  him  there — the  Humanists.  It  was  quite 
natural  that  his  lack  of  Greek  should  increase  his  difficulty  in 
understanding  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification.  The 
Vulgate  translation  obscured  the  truth.  Even  after  he  began 
to  study  Greek  earnestly,  it  was  some  time  before  he  was  at  all 
at  home  in  it.  He  owed  much  to  his  friend  and  brother-monk, 
Joliann  Lange,  who  was  a  line  Greek  scholar,  but  as  late  as 
1518  he  wrote  to  him — addressing  him  as  "  Lange,  the  Greek," 
—  with  a  question  about  avd&rjixa  and  avd&eixa  —  saying 
that  he  himself  could  not  draw  the  Greek  letters.  In  this 
same  year,  however,  Melancthon  began  to  lecture  on  Homer  in 
the  university,  and  this  gave  Luther  a  new  impetus  and  oppor- 
tunity, and  later,  under  the  pressure  of  his  greatest  scholarly 
undertaking,  the  translation  of  the  Bible — first  the  New 
Testament  and  then  the  Old — with  the  opportunities  afforded 
by  the  repeated  denmnds  for  new  editions,  he  succeeded  in 


15 

making  of  himself,  according  to  the  standard  of  the  time,  a 
tolerable  scholar  in  the  original  languages  of  Scripture,  so  that 
although  he  sometimes  spoke  slightingly  of  these  attainments 
he  was  able,  as  he  once  said,  "■  to  meet  fairly  well  a  Hebrew 
or  a  Greek."  The  tremendous  energy  with  which  he  thus 
fitted  himself  for  his  exegetical  work  while  he  was  doing  the 
work  itself,  is  one  of  the  many  remarkable  things  in  his  life. 

It  was  only  by  degrees  that  Luther  broke  away  from  the 
traditional  methods  of  exegesis.  He  was  still  under  their 
influence  when  he  began  to  lecture  on  the  Psalms,  in  1513. 
Indeed,  he  seems  for  a  time  to  have  been  growing  more- and 
more  allegorical  and  mystical  in  his  interpretations.  But  this 
really  indicated  a  deepening  of  his  spiritual  experiences,  which 
he  was  trying  to  match  out  of  that  part  of  Scripture  which 
was  just  then  under  his  hand,  l^one  the  less,  the  method 
was  a  false  one.  He  even  warned  his  students  against  the 
historical  interpretation  of  the  Psalms,  and  went  so  far  in  his 
allegorizing  as  to  find  in  some  Psalms  a  sixfold  sense.  "  He 
was  still  in  the  swaddling-clothes  of  the  allegorizing  method." 
He  said  of  the  Ne\y  Testament  that  a  literal  interpretation  of 
it  was  like  a  literal  interpretation  of  the  (ceremonial)  demands 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Believing  that  the  Old  Testament 
ritual  must  in  some  sense  be  still  binding,  but  not  able  to  think 
that  it  could  be  literally  so,  he  interpreted  it  spiritually,  and 
this  spiritualizing  method  he  carried  even  into  those  parts  of 
Scripture  whose  literal  meaning  is  spiritual.  And  yet  amid  all 
the  fancifulness  of  these  interpretations  we  catch  glimpses  of 
the  future  reformer.  Thus,  "His  dwelling  is  darkness" 
means  that  God  is  hidden  in  the  Church,  which  is  dark  to  the 
world,  hut  revealed  to  God.  In  Ps.  Ixxviii,  16—"  He  brought 
streams  also  out  of  the  rock,  and  caused  waters  to  run  down 
like  rivers  " — he  interpreted  the  rock  of  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Scripture,  the  waters  of  the  believing  peojtles  and  the  Churches. 
He  found  references  to  Christ  everywhere,  even  when  the 
literal  sense  was  made  the  foundation.  Thus  he  says  of 
Ps.  viii,  Y  (A. v.,  v.  6),  that  it  literally  refers  to  the  creation  of 


man,  but  tliat  because  of  the  word  "  all  "  ("  thou  hast  put  all 
things  under  his  feet ")  which  l)elongs  properly  only  to  God, 
the  apostle  {i.  e.  author  of  Ilehrews)  explains  the  passage  of 
Christ,  and  Luther  adds  :  "Wherefore,  since  this  Psalm  appears 
less  applicable  to  Chi'ist  than  many  others,  the  apostle  shows 
me  that  I  am  to  understand  almost  all  of  the  same  Lord."  It 
was  perhaps  this  supposed  encouragement  from  the  New 
Testament  whicli  led  him  to  say  of  Ps.  vi,  T  (A.V.,  v.  6) — 
"  All  the  night  make  I  my  bed  to  swim  :" — "  This  Psalm  is  to 
be  believed  as  teaching  that  the  Lord  wept  very  often,  especially 
in  the  night,  although  this  is  not  written  in  the  Gospel." 

These  illustrations  are  enough  to  show  that  Luther  did  not 
adopt  the  truer  exegetical  methods  which  are  commonly 
associated  w^th  his  name  from  any  natural  aversion  to  the 
scholastic  and  mystical  exegesis,  but  as  the  result  of  a  genuine 
growth  out  of  the  old  into  the  new.  Indications  of  this 
growth  appear  (piite  early.  He  was  himself  soon  dissatisfied 
with  his  first  attempt  at  exegesis,  and  said  no  later  than  the 
winter  of  L516,  that  they  were  "child's  play,  fit  only  for  the 
sponge."  Excesses  of  Christological  interpretation  began  to 
be  pared  down.  Even  in  the  Psalter  of  1513  where  he  made 
marginal  notes  for  his  lectures,  his  own  hand  modified  a 
Christological  interpretation  of  Ps.  cxl,  and  erased  one  of  Ps, 
cxxxix.  Some  of  these  earliest  notes,  compared  with  the  expo- 
sition of  the  seven  penitential  Psalms,  printed  in  1517 — ^liis 
first  published  exegetical  work — and  with  the  revised  edition 
of  the  same,  which  appeared  in  1525,  enable  us  to  measure 
with  some  fairness  the  advance  of  these  years :  e.  ^.,  Ps. 
vi  is  said,  in  Luther's  MSS.  notes  of  1513,  to  be  uttered  by 
Christ ;  in  the  publication  of  1517,  to  be  spoken  by  a  sinner, 
or  by  Christ  in  the  person  of  sinners.  The  edition  of  1525 
strikes  out  the  words,  "  by  Christ."  Ps.  xxxviii  is  called,  in  the 
MSS.  notes,  and  so  in  the  exposition  of  1517,  "A  prayer  of 
Christ  in  his  suft'ering  and  penitence  which  he  had  for  our 
sins."  T]ie  edition  of  1525  gives  up  the  reference  to  Christ. 
Ps.   cii   is   interpreted,   in    1513   and    1517,   as   a   longing  for 


Christ;  in  1825,  as  a  longing  for  grace.     Such  examples  might 
be  greatly  multiplied. 

The  exegetical  principles  which  Luther  finally  reached 
were  based,  of  course,  on  his  great  doctrines  of  the  supreme 
autliority  of  Scripture,  and  the  right  of  private  interpretation. 
These  two  fundamental  positions  limited  and  supplemented 
each  other.  Thus  he  made  use  of  the  Christian  freedom 
whicli  he  claimed,  not  only  to  pass — somewhat  hastily,  indeed, 
and  on  too  narrow  grounds — upon  the  canonicity  of  different 
books,  looking  rather  askance,  for  example,  upon  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  that  of  James,  and  the  Apocalypse,  but 
also  in  considering  questions  of  date  and  authorship,  or 
editorship  —  e.  g.,  of  the  Pentateuch,  of  Samuel,  of  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Hosea,  Ecclesiastes,  Ezra,  etc.  On  the  other  hand, 
he  insisted  on  the  need  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  aid,  of  a  sense 
of  awe,  of  humility  and  of  earnest  prayer,  in  addition  to  a 
sound  knowledge  of  Hebrew  and  Greek.  It  was  on  the 
double  foundation  of  these  two  doctrines  that  his  exegetical 
principles  rested.  The  most  important  of  these  principles 
were  the  following : 

1.  The  Scripture  must  be  looked  at  ohjeoti'vely.  The  great 
desire  must  be  to  learn  exactly  what  the  Scripture  says — 
simply  to  understand. 

The  observance  of  a  principle  like  this — even  the  attempt 
to  observe  it — was  an  immense  step  in  advance.  The  endeavor 
— not  to  find  that  the  Bible  means  what  we  have  been  think- 
ing, and  would  therefore  like  to  have  it  mean,  but  to  know 
precisely  what  it  does  mean — honestly  to  receive  God's  mes- 
sage to  us  out  of  it ;  it  is  a  far-reaching  principle.  To  have 
recognized  the  absolute  necessity  of  it  is  one  of  Luther's  chief 
claims  to  our  respect,  in  his  exegetical  work.  We  need  not 
be  surprised  that  he  did  not  always  practise  it.  Perfect 
consistency  here  has  not  even  yet  been  attained  by  all  persons 
who  study  the  Bible. 

2.  The  simple,  literal  sense  has  the  prime  value.  ''  The 
single,  right,  chief -meaning,  which  the  letters  give,"  Luther 


18 

called  it.  He  did  not  wholly  renounce  the  allegorical  method, 
but  he  assigned  it  a  quite  subordinate  place.  When  any 
doctrine  was  at  stake  lie  was  close  and  literal — sometimes 
even  too  literal,  as  in  the  sacramental  controversy.  Elsewhere, 
and  es]3ecially  for  jDractical  purposes,  he  admitted  the  allegory 
as  an  ornament,  or  an  enforcement,  not  as  an  essential  part  of 
his  exegesis.  "Allegories,"  he  said,  "may  be  used  to  teach 
the  ignorant  common  people,  who  need  to  have  the  same 
thing  impressed  in  various  forms."  This  he  illusti*ated  by  aji 
interjjretation  of  Is.  vi,  in  which  he  made  the  serajjhim  repre- 
sent apostles  and  preachers,  the  wings  mean  the  ministry  of 
the  word,  flying,  the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel,  the  cover- 
ing of  the  feet,  a  sign  that  preachers  must  not  be  boastful. 
But  he  kept  such  allegorizing  almost  always  within  the  limits 
he  himself  assigned. 

3.  Closely  allied  with  the  preceding  was  his  insistence  on 
the  historical  sense.  He  tried,  in  many  cases,  to  determine 
and  to  portray  the  liistorical  background  of  the  particular 
Scripture  in  hand.  Thus  he  would  have  his  reader  to  make 
sure  "  whether  the  words  are  addressed  to  thee  or  to  some  one 
else."  It  is  true  that  he  still  found  too  many  New  Testament 
doctrines  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  particularly  that  the  mys- 
tical interpretation,  which  found  Christ  everywhere,  had  still 
too  much  influence  over  him.  He  even  said  :  "  The  prophets, 
too — because  they  announced  the  Gospel,  and  spoke  of  Clirist, 
their  teaching,  in  the  places  w^here  they  speak  of  Christ,  is  no 
other  than  the  true,  pure,  genuine  gospel,  as  if  Luke  or 
Matthew  had  written  it."  Still,  it  was  true  of  him,  on  the 
whole,  that  he  strove  after  tlie  historical  sense,  and  in  this, 
also,  he  was  the  forerunner  of  the  better  exegesis  of  to-day. 

4.  Scrijiture  is  to  l)e  interpreted  by  Scripture.  Texts  are 
not  to  be  explained  in  isolation,  but  in  the  light  of  the  w^iole. 
This  is  a  most  valuable  principle  if  rightly  applied,  l)ut  it  is 
subject  to  peculiar  dangers.  In  Luther's  case  it  sometimes 
encouraged  his  tendency  to  find  his  favorite  truths  in  all  parts 
of  the  Bible.     It  remained,  indeed,  to  the  end,  a  defect  in  his 


19 

exegetical  jjroeesses  that  lie  constantly  nsed  exegesis  to  set  forth 
doctrine  argumentatively.  So  far,  he  never  ceased  to  follow  the 
scholastic  method,  but  always  with  the  fundamental  difference 
that  the  doctrines  themselves,  to  which  he  clung  with  the  inten- 
sest  belief,  were  derived  from  a  candid  study  of  the  Scrijsture. 
Thus  there  were  two  sets  of  passages  where  his  exegesis  was 
at  its  best,  {a)  those  which  really  contained  these  doctrines,  and 
(b)  those  which  manifestly  had  nothing  to  do  with  these  doc- 
trines. It  could  not,  however,  be  otherwise.  He  would 
probably  have  lost  in  effective  power  if  it  had  been  otherwise. 

His  great  exegetical  works  illustrate  the  points  above  men- 
tioned. His  second  course  of  theological  lectures  at  Witten- 
berg was  on  Romans — when  he  expounded  the  difference 
between  the  righteousness  of  works  and  the  righteousness 
that  comes  by  faith.  His  third  course  (in  1516)  was  on  Gala- 
tians,  and  the  contrast  between  Law  and  Gospel.  This  was 
revised  and  published  in  1519,  and  republished,  after  a  new 
revision  and  delivery,  in  1535.  A  sound  exegesis  lies  at  the 
core  of  this  famous  book,  and  yet  it  is,  in  the  main,  a  powerful 
dogmatic  treatise.  It  was  largely  this  characteristic  of  it  which 
gave  it  so  direct  an  influence  as  an  evangelizing  force,  not  only 
in  Germany,  but,  since  1575,  in  many  editions,  in  an  English 
dress,  and  among  English-speaking  people.  John  Bunyan  was 
among  the  many  who  have  been  under  the  deepest  obligations 
to  this  book,  in  which,  whatever  an  ideal  exegesis  might  stamp 
as  imperfections  of  detail,  the  heart  of  men  was  brought  into 
close  contact  with  the  living  truth  of  God. 

In  this  and  many  other  published  commentaries,  in  count- 
less sermons  and  letters,  by  the  force  of  Luther's  example  and 
through  the  adoption  of  his  methods  elsewhere,  the  influence 
of  the  new  exegesis  made  itself  felt.  But  the  translation  of 
the  Bible  was  Luther's  greatest  exegetical  work  —  and  an 
exegetical  work  it  emphatically  was ;  the  one  in  which  his 
faults  are  least  apparent,  and  his  splendid  qualities  as  an  exe- 
gete  most  prominent.  It  was  a  marvel  of  conscientious,  per- 
sistent toil.     To   understand   and  to   make  understood  were 


20 

his  steady  aims.  For  da3's  and  even  weeks  he  would  la])or  over 
a  single  word.  But  there  was  no  pedantry  in  this.  He  took 
infinite  pains  to  iind  the  exact  words  which  would  best  conve}' 
the  meaning  to  the  people.  Having  learned  Hebrew  and 
Greek,  he  set  himself  not  merely  to  learn  but  to  create  the 
German  language.  He  took  as  the  best  basis,  within  his  reach, 
a  form  of  diplomatic  German,  which  was  cold  and  meagre 
enough,  but  which  he  warmed  and  enriched.  On  the  one  hand, 
he  borrowed  a  spiritual  vocabulary  from  the  Mystics  of  a  former 
age.  On  the  other,  he  elevated  and  adapted  to  a  sacred  use 
the  vulgar  speech  which  he  heard  around  him.  He  listened 
to  children  at  their  play,  and  common  people  at  their  work. 
As  he  travelled  he  was  on  the  lookout  for  the  peculiarities 
of  dialects.  He  made  a  butcher  slaughter  a  sheep  for  him, 
and  name  to  him  all  the  internal  organs,  that  he  might  have 
the  correct  expressions  in  translating  the  laws  of  sacrifice. 
With  this  prodigious  and  patient  industry,  under  the  guidance 
of  his  rij^ening  principles  of  exegesis,  it  is  no  wonder  that  the 
result  was  a  masterpiece. 

A  single  word  in  closing  : 

It  ought  never  to  be  forgotten  that  the  two  great  reform- 
ers, Luther  and  Calvin,  were  both  great  exegetes.  They  were 
alike  humble  students  of  God's  word — alike  fearless  and  free 
in  their  attitude  toward  the  traditional  interpretations — 
neither  was  wholly  without  dogmatic  bias.  Calvin  was  the 
more  learned,  the  more  calm,  the  more  consistent ;  Luther,  the 
more  practical,  the  more  enthusiastic . 

Luther  was  the  man  to  fire  a  people  with  unquenchable 
zeal  for  the  study  of  the  Scripture ;  Calvin  the  man  to  build 
his  exegetical  methods  and  results  into  the  life  of  coming 
generations. 

FRANCIS  BROWN. 


ly. 

LUTHER  AS  A  KEFOEMEK. 


Two  years  ago  the  New  Testament  was  republished  in  a 
revised  version  to  tlie  English-speaking  world,  and  read  by 
more  millions  than  in  whole  centuries  before  the  Reformation. 
This  year  the  principles  of  evangelical  Protestantism  are  re- 
published in  innumerable  addresses  and  sermons  not  only  in 
Eisleben,  Eisenach,  Erfurt  and  Wittenberg,  but  tliroughout 
Christendom,  in  languages  unknown  to  Luther,  in  countries 
which  at  the  time  of  his  birth  were  not  yet  discovered,  and  in 
nations  which  then  were  not  yet  born.  No  man  has  been  so 
much  honored,  no  man — save  the  apostles — deserves  so  much 
to  be  held  in  grateful  remembrance  as  Martin  Luther,  remark- 
able alike  as  a  man,  as  a  Christian,  as  a  husband  and  father,  as 
a  theologian,  as  a  Bible  translator,  catechist  and  hymnist,  as 
the  bold  champion  of  the  freedom  of  conscience,  as  the  founder 
of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  as  the  chief  leader  of  that  Refor- 
mation which  carried  Christendom  back  to  lirst  principles  and 
urged  it  forward  to  new  conquests.  Such  a  man  belongs  not 
to  a  sect,  but  to  the  whole  church  of  Christ ;  and  even  those 
who  dissent  from  some  of  his  favorite  opinions,  must  say  : 
Luther,  with  all  thy  faults  I  love  thee  still.  Zwingli  gave 
expression  to  this  feeling  when,  in  the  heat  of  the  eucharistic 
controversy,  and  with  tears  in  his  eyes,  he  offered  him  the 
hand  of  brotherhood  at  Marburg. 

The  principles  of  the  Reformation  for  which  Luther  lived 
and  was  ready  to  die  at  any  moment,  are  the  propelling  forces 
of  modern  church  history.  They  have  stood  the  test  of  more 
than  three  hundred  years,  against  persecution  from  without 
and  corruption  from  within,  and  are  still  as  vital  as  ever. 


95 


They  carry  in  themselves  the  possibility  and  guarantee  of 
further  reformation  on  the  same  immovable  foundation  of 
God's  holy  word,  which,  in  the  language  of  St.  Augustine, 
has  haustos  prhnos,  haustos  secundos^  haiistos  tertios,  haustos 
injhiitos.  Christianity  itself  is  perfect,  but  there  is  a  pro- 
gressive understanding  and  application  of  it  in  the  history  of 
the  church. 

Freedom  in  Christ  is  the  ultimate  root  of  evangelical  Pro- 
testantism ;  while  freedom  from  Christ  is  the  essence  of 
rationalistic  pseudo-Protestantism,  and  bondage  in  the  law  is 
tlie  essence  of  Romanism.  From  that  root  sprung  three 
branches,  which  we  may  call  the  three  principles  of  Protes- 
tantism :  the  supremacy  of  the  Bihle^  the  supremacy  of  faith, 
the  sup)remacy  of  the  people.  These  principles  constitute  a 
trinity  in  unity  and  a  unity  in  trinity.  The  first  is  the  objective 
principle,  and  relates  to  the  source  and  rule  of  faith  ;  the 
second  is  subjective,  and  belongs  to  the  sphere  of  practical 
experience,  or  the  religion  of  the  heart;  the  third  is  social, 
and  relates  to  the  life  and  organization  of  the  church. 

1.  The  first  principle  is  expressed  in  the  statement:  The 
Word  of  God  as  contained  in  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  and  Xew  Testaments  is  the  only  infallible  source  and 
rule  of  the  Christian  faith  and  duty.  It  alone  can  bind  the 
conscience,  and  every  one  has  the  right  and  duty  to  read, 
explain,  and  obey  it  to  the  best  of  his  ability,  and  in  full 
view  of  his  personal  responsibility  to  the  Lord  of  conscience. 
This  principle  is  opposed  to  the  principle  of  traditionalism, 
which  so  overloads  the  Word  of  God  with  human  traditions 
as  to  hide  it  from  the  people  and  to  make  it  of  no  effect. 
"  The  Bible,  the  whole  Bible,  and  nothing  but  the  Bible,  is 
the  religion  of  Protestants."  Yet  the  Bible  must  be  interpreted 
by  the  mind  of  the  church  as  well  as  by  the  individual.  No 
sound  Protestant  despises  the  lessons  of  history,  the  value  of 
doctrinal  standards,  the  common  teaching  and  experience  of 
Christendom,  but  he  subordinates  them  all  to  the  oracles  of 
the  living  God,  who  is  wiser  than  all  the  wisdom  of  men.    We 


23 

honor  the  fathers,  but  still  more  the  grandfathers.  We  follow 
the  river  up  to  the  fountain.  Amicus  Augustinus,  sed  ftiagis 
amicus  Paulus^  et  maxime  amicus  Ghristus. 

With  the  Bible  in  his  hand,  head,  and  heart,  Luther  went 
forth  to  fight  his  battles  against  the  pope  and  the  devil, 
being  assured  that  "  one  little  word  "  of  the  Almighty  can 
slay  them.  On  this  immovable  rock  the  humble  monk 
took  his  stand  at  the  diet  of  Worms,  U7ius  versus  Qnundum, 
strong  in  the  sense  of  his  weakness,  independent  in  the  sense 
of  his  dependence,  free  in  his  obedience  to  God  and  the  voice 
of  Lis  conscience.  And  he  conquered  notwithstanding  the 
pope's  bull  and  the  emperor's  ban. 

"  With  our  own  strength  we  nothing  can, 
Full  soon  we  were  down-ridden  ; 
But  for  us  fights  the  proper  man 
Whom  Grod  himself  has  bidden. 
Ask  ye,  who  is  the  same  r" 
Christ  Jesus  is  his  name, 
The  Lord  God  Sabaoth  : 
He,  and  no  other  god. 
Shall  conquer  in  the  battle." 

2.  The  second  principle  is  justification  by  faith  in  dis- 
tinction from  justification  by  works.  Faith  is  the  pioneer  of 
all  great  thoughts  and  deeds.  It  is  the  bond  of  confidence 
between  man  and  man,  between  man  and  God.  "The  just 
shall  live  by  faith,"  is  the  theme  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  By  faith  Abraham  stands  out  as  the  father  of  a 
generation  as  innumerable  as  the  stars  in  heaven ;  by  faith 
Moses  became  the  lawgiver  of  Israel ;  faith  inspired  the 
Psalms  of  David,  and  prophecies  of  Isaiah ;  by  faith  the 
fishermen  of  Galilee  were  made  fishers  of  men  and  pillars  of 
the  church.  "Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee,"  we  hear  again  and 
again  from  the  lips  of  Christ  in  the  Gospels,  but  never :  "  Thy 
works  have  saved  thee ;"  or  "  Charity  has  saved  thee."  "Who- 
soever believeth  in  me  hath  eternal  life."  Faith,  simple,  child- 
like, boundless  trust  in  Christ,  as  our  all-sufiicient  Lord  and 
Saviour,  is  the  soul  of  true  piety.    This  faith  alone  justifies. 


24 

because  it  apprehends,  appropria^ies,  and  assimilates  the  grace 
of  God  in  Christ,  which  is  the  only  ground  and  cause  of 
justification.  But  faitli,  or  rather  the  grace  of  God  through 
faith,  is  also  the  root  of  sanctification  ;  it  overcomes  the  workl 
and  abounds  in  fruits  of  righteousness.  In  receiving  Christ, 
faith  receives  a  new  life  and  a  power  of  holiness  which  must 
at  once  manifest  itself.  Good  works  are  necessary,  not  as 
conditions,  it  is  true,  but  as  evidences  of  justification,  and  a 
faitli  which  shows  no  works  is  dead,  and  no  faith  at  all  in  the 
sense  of  PauL  The  reformers  insisted  as  strongly  on  a  holy 
life  as  their  opponents,  and  the  moral  condition  of  Protestant 
countries  contrasts  favorably  with  Roman  Catholic.  Luther 
indeed,  in  the  heat  of  polemics,  depreciated  the  Epistle  of  James, 
and  could  not  reconcile  him  with  his  favorite  Paul,  who  yet 
furnishes  the  key  for  the  reconciliation  in  his  pregnant  phrase  : 
"  Faith  working  through  love  "  (Tiiazcz  ot  ayd-r^Q  iuspyou/jiiuTj). 
But  in  his  best  and  final  utterances,  Luther  did  full  justice 
to  the  working  power  of  faith,  which  made  him  a  reformer. 
''  Faith,"  he  says,  in  his  Preface  to  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  "  faith  is  a  living,  busy,  active,  mighty  thing,  and 
it  is  impossible  that  it  should  not  do  good  without  ceas- 
ing. Faith  does  not  ask  whetlier  good  works  are  to  be  done, 
but  before  the  question  is  put,  it  has  done  them  already,  and 
is  always  engaged  in  doing  them.  You  may  as  well  separate 
burning  and  shining  from  tire,  as  works  from  faith." 

3.  Tlie  third  principle  is  the  general  priesthood  of  be- 
lievers in  opposition  to  an  exclusive  hierarchy  or  priest-cast, 
which  claims  to  be  the  indispensable  mediator  between  God 
and  man ;  thus  setting  aside  the  eternal  priesthood  of  Christ, 
and  assigning  to  the  laity  the  degrading  position  of  passive 
obedience.  Let  me  again  quote  from  Luther,  who  always  hit 
the  nail  on  the  head,  and  could  say  the  deepest  things  in  the 
plainest  language.  "  It  is  faith,"  says  he,  "  that  makes  men 
priests,  faith  that  unites  them  to  Christ,  and  gives  them 
the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  whereby  they  become  tilled 
with   all   holy  grace  and  heavenly  power.     This   inward  an- 


25 

nointing — this  oil,  better  than  any  that  ever  came  from  the 
liorn  of  bishop  or  pope — gives  them  not  the  name  only,  but  the 
nature,  the  purity,  the  power  of  priests  ;  and  this  annointing 
have  all  they  received  who  are  believers  in  Christ."  The  gene- 
ral priesthood  implies  the  right  and  duty  of  every  believer  to 
read  the  Word  of  God  in  his  vernacular  tongue,  to  go  directly 
to  the  throne  of  grace,  and  to  take  an  active  part  in  all  the 
affairs  of  the  church  according  to  his  peculiar  gift  and  calling. 
It  makes  the  whole  congregation  an  active,  working,  evangeliz- 
ing power,  and  utilizes  every  member  for  the  general  good. 

Schleiermacher  reduced  the  whole  difference  between 
Romanism  and  Protestantism  to  the  formula  :  "  Romanism 
makes  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  Clirist  depend  on  his 
relation  to  the  church,  Protestantism,  vice  versa^  makes  the 
relation  of  the  individual  to  the  church  depend  on  his  relation 
to  Christ."  In  other  words.  Protestantism  puts  Christ  before 
the  church,  the  Christian  before  the  churchman,  and  measures 
man's  piety  by  his  Christliness  rather  than  his  churchliness. 
But  the  best  Christians  are  also  or  ought  to  be  the  most  active 
and  useful  church  members. 

The  principle  of  the  general  priesthood  of  the  Christian 
people  is  the  true  source  of  religious  and  civil  freedom.  It 
has  never  yet  been  fully  realized  in  Europe,  but  has  its  widest 
prospects  in  the  virgin  soil  of  this  vast  republic  under  the 
sunshine  of  liberty.  What  else  is  universal  suffrage  but  the 
application  of  that  principle  to  the  political  and  civil  sphere? 
The  true  Christian  is  not  only  a  priest,  but  also  a  king.  As  a 
king  he  has  a  share  in  the  government  of  the  people,  by  the 
people,  and  for  the  people.  But  let  us  not  forget  that,  as  the 
general  priesthood  is  based  on  faith  in  Christ,  our  only  high- 
priest,  so  the  general  kingship  is  based  on  the  moral  power 
of  self-government.  Only  he  is  truly  free  whom  the  truth  has 
made  free.  That  freedom  alone  can  stand  the  test  of  time, 
and  be  a  blessing  to  the  people.  A  republic  without  the  Bible, 
without  the  Lord's  Day,  without  the  Lord's  Church,  is  an 
empty  shell  and  will  be  broken  to  pieces. 


26 

Tliese  three  great  principles  were  in  Luther  not  mere  notions 
or  scholastic  formulas,  but  vital  truths.  Thej  were  the  ripe 
fruits  of  his  profound  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  his  severe 
ascetic  self-discipline  in  the  convent  at  Erfurt.  He  passed 
through  that  intense  moral  struggle  described  by  St.  Paul  in 
the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Romans.  Those  truths  were  his 
very  life,  his  strength,  his  comfort,  his  joy.  The  Bible  was 
his  daily  food,  faith  was  the  element  in  which  he  moved,  and 
prayer  was  the  breath  of  his  soul. 

Let  us  then,  my  fellow-students,  learn  this  practical  lesson 
from  the  Luther  celebration.  Let  us  vitalize  and  individualize 
those  great  principles  of  which  he  stands  out  as  a  typical 
representative.  Let  us  imitate  him  as  far  as  he  imitated  Paul, 
and  as  Paul  imitated  Christ.  Let  us  be  theologians  after 
God's  own  heart,  mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  full  of  faith  and 
good  works,  and  fervent  in  prayer.  Let  us,  as  true  priests, 
live  in  dail}^  communion  with  God  and  consecrate  our  persons 
to  His  service  which  is  perfect  freedom. 

Thus  you  will  become  a  blessing  to  your  generation,  and 
help  to  prepare  the  way  for  that  grander  reformation  and 
reunion  of  divided  Christendom  which  the  Lord  of  the  Church 
will  surely  bring  about  in  His  own  good  time. 

PHILIP  SCHAFF. 


V. 

LUTHEK  A8  A  THEOLOGIAN. 


"  The  student  of  theology,"  says  Lutlier,  in  liis  Table-Talk, 
"  has  now  far  greater  advantages  than  students  ever  had. 
First,  lie  has  the  Bible,  which  I  have  translated  so  clearly  into 
German  that  any  one  may  readily  comprehend  it.  Next,  he 
has  Melancthon's  Common  Places,  which  he  should  read  over 
and  over  again,  until  he  has  it  by  heart.  Once  master  of  these 
two  volumes,  he  may  be  regarded  as  a  theologian  whom 
neither  devil  nor  heretic  can  overcome  ;  for  he  has  all  divinity 
at  his  fingers'  ends,  and  may  read  understandingly  wliatsoever 
else  he  pleases.  Afterwards,  he  may  study  Melancthon's 
Commentary  on  Romans,  and  mine  on  Deuteronomy  and 
Galatians,  and  practise  eloquence.  Melancthon  is  a  better 
logician  than  myself ;  he  argues  better.  My  superiority  lies 
rather  in  the  rhetorical  way." 

Luther's  estimate  of  himself  is  modest  and  moderate.  Yet 
on  the  whole  a  correct  one.  His  power  as  a  theologian  did 
not  lie  in  systematizing,  but  rather  in  penetrating  and  deep 
views  of  particular  truths.  He  was  inferior  to  Melancthon, 
and  still  more  to  Calvin,  in  the  ability  to  combine  doctrines 
into  a  scientific  whole. 

The  same  is  true  of  him  in  regard  to  the  political  side  of 
the  Reformation.  He  could  do  single  things  well  and  power- 
fully. He  could  quell  by  his  mighty  preaching  the  fanati- 
cism of  Carlstadt  and  Miinzer,  and  keep  his  followers  from 
excesses  in  doctrine  and  practice.  But  others  must  organize 
the  Reformation,  and  manage  its  interests  as  related  to  the 
Swiss,  Dutch,  and  French  peoples. 

But  in  reference  to  some  single  doctrines,  Luther  had  very 


28 

great  insight,  acuteness,  and  logical  strength.  The  doctrine  of 
justitication  bj  faith  only,  will  immediately  suggest  itself. 
The  jjrecision  and  carefulness  with  which  Lutliei*  distinguished 
between  justitication  and  sanctiiication  saved  Protestantism 
from  lapsing  back  into  the  Romish  view  of  good  works. 
And  whenever  in  Protestantism  this  distinction  is  obliterated, 
Protestantism  slides  down  into  legalism  and  sacramentarianism. 
Luther  opposed  the  doctrine  of  justitication  by  works,  in  both 
the  coarse  and  the  refined  form  of  it.  Justification  by  works 
may  mean,  that  sin  is  pardoned  because  of  an  external  work — 
like  penance,  or  pilgrimage,  or  the  payment  of  money  in  the 
purchase  of  absolution.  Or  it  may  mean  that  sin  is  pardoned 
because  of  an  internal  work — such  as  the  exercise  of  faith, 
hope,  and  charity.  The  crude  statement  is  :  Money  will  buy 
the  remission  of  sin.  The  refined  statement  is :  Goodness  of 
heart  and  upright  moral  character  will  merit  it.  The  two 
forms  are  one  in  princiiDle.  In  both  cases  alike,  the  reason 
why  sin  is  forgiven  is  found  in  the  work  and  agency  of  man, 
and  not  in  the  work  of  Christ.  The  ground  of  pardon  and 
justification  is  a  human  one,  in  both  instances.  Luther  saw 
with  a  clear  eye,  not  only  the  error  in  the  coarse  legalism  of 
Tetzel,  but  in  the  subtle  legalism  of  the  more  spiritual  of  the 
Papal  theologians — a  legalism  that  was  subsequently  formu- 
lated in  the  half-truth  of  the  canons  of  Trent. 

For  Luther,  as  for  Paul,  justification  means  only  that  side 
of  redemption  which  concerns  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  The 
other  side,  which  concerns  the  sanctiiication  of  the  heart,  he 
insisted  upon  as  strongly  as  any  one.  But  he  refused  to  make 
tlie  latter  the  reason  and  ground  of  the  formei" — to  mix  the 
two  things  and  spoil  ])oth.  For  a  justification  that  rests  upon 
good  works,  either  internal  or  external,  as  its  meritorious  and 
procuring  cause,  is  neither  gracious  nor  gratuitous  ;  and  good 
works  that  are  connected  with  this  spurious  justification  are 
not  spontaneous  and  hearty,  but  servile  and  forced. 

]  I  once  Luther  refused  to  say  that  justification  depends 
ii|)()ii  \v(ti"ks  in  any  sliape  or  form.     It  does  not  depend  upon 


29 

faith  and  works  togetlicr ;  and  still  less  upon  works  alone. 
With  St.  Paul  he  said :  "  A  man  is  justified  by  faith  without 
the  deeds  of  the  law.  To  him  that  worketh  not,  but  believeth 
on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  counted  for 
righteousness,"  It  is  not  the  godly  man,  but  the  ungodly, 
who  is  forgiven  and  pronounced  just  for  Christ's  sake  alone. 

This  doctrine  of  Luther  is  objected  to  by  some  Protestants. 
Canon  Mozley,  for  example,  complains  that  Luther's  statement 
of  justification  "  requires  us  to  beliet-e  that  that  which  makes 
a  man  pleasing  to  God,  or  justifies  him,  has  nothing  to  do 
with  morality  or  goodness  "  (Essays,  I,  431).  This  is  the  old 
Romish  error  of  supposing  that  justification  means  making 
just — that  "to  justify  a  sinner,"  and  "  to  make  a  sinner  pleasing 
to  God,"  are  one  and  the  same  thing.  But  in  Luther's  view, 
as  in  St.  Paul's,  they  were  wdiolly  distinct  things,  though 
inseparable  from  each  other.  God  never  justified  a  sinner 
whom  he  did  not  sanctify,  or  in  Mozley's  pln-ase  "make 
pleasing  "  to  himself.  But,  in  the  order,  he  justified  him  be- 
fore he  sanctified  him.  He  first  forgave  his  sin  solely  because 
Christ  died  for  sin,  and  then  he  made  him  a  good  man. 
Pardon  is  first  in  the  order,  and  sanctification  is  second. 
"Whom  he  justified  them  he  also  glorified."  The  two  things, 
though  thus  inseparable,  rest  upon  different  bases.  Justifica- 
tion is  founded  upon  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  solely  and 
only;  sanctification  results  from  the  operation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  heart.  Because  the  two  things  are  inseparable, 
it  does  not  follow  that  they  are  one  and  the  same  thing ;  or 
that  one  is  the  procuring  cause  of  the  other.  Drinking  and 
eating  are  inseparable,  and  both  alike  necessary  to  life ;  but 
this  does  not  prove  that  drinking  is  the  same  thing  as  eating, 
or  that  it  is  the  food  which  a  man  eats  that  quenches  his 
thirst.  To  say  that  a  man  is  justified  by  being  inwardly 
sanctified,  or,  in  Mozley's  phrase,  by  "  being  made  pleasing  to 
God,"  is  precisely  like  saying  that  thirst  is  slaked  by  eating 
bread. 

Again,  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  was  settled  by  Luther 


30 

with  clearness  and  profundity.  The  bondage  of  the  af>ostate 
will  very  early  became  a  disputed  point.  Eck  contended  with 
Carlstadt — the  former  asserting  synergism,  the  latter  mon- 
ergism.  Eck  seemed  to  have  the  better  of  the  argument. 
Luther  then  entered  the  lists,  and  carried  the  day  for  the 
Augustinian  view  of  sin.  His  treatise  on  Free  Will,  though 
highly  polemic  against  Erasmus  and  objectionable  in  jihrases, 
yet  presents  substantially  the  same  view  of  the  sinner's 
impotence  to  which  Oalvin  subsequently  gave  celebrity. 
Luther's  doctrine  of  the  bondage  of  the  will  has  been  charged 
with  fatalism,  as  his  doctrine  of  justification  has  been  with 
antinomianism — but  unjustly.  His  phraseology,  occasionally, 
if  taken  by  itself,  and  aj^art  from  the  qualifying  connection, 
is  indeed  liable  to  the  charge ;  but  never  when  taken  with 
the  context,  and  mitigated  by  it. 

In  brief,  then,  we  may  say  that  Luther  as  a  theologian  had 
a  penetrating  rather  than  a  constructive  mind.  He  was  a 
close  and  accurate  reasoner  upon  the  important  truths  con- 
nected with  sin,  and  justification  from  sin.  On  other  subjects 
he  was  not  so  powerful,  and  in  some  cases  not  so  accm'ate. 
He  does  not  appear  to  have  devoted  nmch  study  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  trinity.  He  expended  much  thought  upon 
the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  but  did  not  succeed  in  entirely 
clearing  himself  from  the  Romish  errors.  He  did  not  attempt, 
like  Melancthon  and  Calvin,  to  bring  his  views  into  a  system. 
His  followers  endeavored  to  do  this ;  but  did  not  succeed 
in  constructing  a  well-rounded  and  symmetrical  theology. 
Lutheran  ism  has  never  been  so  clearly  defined  and  self- 
consistent  a  scheme  as  Calvinism;  nor  have  the  churches 
founded  upon  it  been  marked  by  the  solidarity  of  the  Calvin- 
istic  bodies.  And  the  reason  lay  in  the  fact,  that  there  were 
some  heterogeneous  elements  in  Luther's  views  that  were  in- 
compatible with  a  thoroughly  harmonious  body  of  'livinity. 

WILLIAM  G.  T.  SHEDD. 


VI. 

LUTHER  WITH  THE  CHILDREN. 


One  of  the  most  striking  traits  of  Lutlier's  character  was 
his  sympathy  with  childhood.  In  the  quality  and  power  of 
this  sympathy  he  stood  alone  among  all  the  Reformers.  And 
herein,  no  doubt,  lay  one  secret  of  his  niighty  influence  over 
the  common  people  of  Germany.  They  loved  and  trusted 
him  because  he  showed  such  deep  interest  in  their  children. 
Luther's  work  as  a  Reformer  was  very  rough  work  and 
required  nerves  of  iron ;  for  he  "  wrestled  not  against  flesh 
and  blood,  but  against  principalities,  against  powers,  against 
the  rulers  of  the  darkness  of  this  w^orld,  against  spiritual 
wickedness  in  high  places."  The  tendency  of  such  a  struggle 
was  to  repress,  if  not  deaden,  the  finer  sensibilities  of  our  nature. 
You  w^ould  scarce  expect  that  one  in  the  very  stress  of  a  battle, 
on  whose  issue  he  believed  the  fate  of  Christendom  to  hang, 
would  stop  to  seek  aid  and  comfort  from  a  child.  Yet  this  is 
what  Luther  did.  "  I  have  often  need,  in  my  tribulations,  to 
talk  even  with  a  child,  in  order  to  expel  such  thoughts,  as  the 
devil  possesses  me  with.  I  need  one  at  times  to  help  me,  who, 
in  his  whole  body,  has  not  so  much  divinity  as  I  have  in  one 
finger." 

In  recent  discussions  of  his  life  and  work,  it  has  been  often 
pointed  out,  that  Luther's  immense  infiuence  was  rooted  in 
his  Christian  manhood.  It  is  equally  true  that  a  vital 
element  of  his  extraordinary  personal  power  and  magnetism 
was  the  child-like  spirit  that  was  in  him.  His  heart  was  like 
the  heart  of  a  little  girl  for  artless  simplicity,  tenderness  and 
a  certain  irrepressible  gaiety.  This  is  the  more  notewoi-thy  in 
view  of  the  somewhat  stern  home-discipline,  the  hardships  at 


32 

school  and  other  trials,  which  marked  his  early  years.  These 
sharp  experiences,  that  would  have  soured  for  life  a  nature  less 
sweet  and  generous,  served  rather  in  his  case  to  train  him  for 
the  beautiful  office  of  the  children's  friend. 

There  are  three  ways  in  which  Luther's  wonderful  sym- 
pathy with  childhood  especially  showed  itself;  namely — in 
his  catechism,  in  his  theology,  and  in  his  home. 

(1.)  In  his  Catechism.  This,  it  is  true,  was  not  intended 
exclusively  for  the  young,  but  for  all  ages  and  all  classes.  It 
is,  however,  more  than  any  other  product  of  the  early  Refor- 
mation, the  children's  book.  "God  assembles  unto  Himself 
a  Christian  church  out  of  little  children  "  said  Luther;  and  his 
catechism  aimed  to  make  them  conscious  of  their  privileges. 
If  none  but  a  learned  man  of  God,  full  of  faith  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  could  have  written  it,  neither  could  it  have  been 
written  by  one,  who  had  not  become  as  a  little  child.  Theo- 
logically and  practically,  it  has  been  a  great  force  in  history. 
"  It  may  be  bought  for  a  sixpence,  but  six  thousand  worlds 
would  not  pay  for  it,"  said  Luther's  old  friend,  Dr.  Justus  Jonas. 
And  in  our  own  day  the  venerable  historian  Ranke  has  said  : 
"  It  is  as  childlike  as  it  is  profound,  as  comprehensible  as  it  is 
unfathomable,  simple,  and  sublime."  Almost  the  whole  of  it 
may  be  used  as  a  prayer,  so  charged  is  it  with  the  devotional 
element.  Luther  himself,  in  his  old  age,  was  in  the  habit  of 
praying  it.  This  indicates  its  character.  Our  Shorter  Cate- 
chism is  unsurpassed  in  its  kind  ;  it  contains  admirable  state- 
ments of  Christian  doctrine ;  and  some  of  its  answers,  like 
that  to  the  question.  What  is  the  chief  end  of  man  ?  may 
serve  as  keys  to  the  whole  divine  system.  But  with  all  its 
excellencies  you  could  not  easily  ^ray  the  Shorter  Catechism  ; 
it  is  didactic  rather  than  devotional.  Luther's  Catechism, 
then,  is  a  noble  monument  of  his  deep  sympathy  with  child- 
hood no  less  than  of  his  reforming  genius.  By  it  he  overthrew 
the  confessional  and  put  in  its  place  faithful  instruction,  both 
parental  and  pastoral,  in  the  saving  truths  of  the  Gospel ;  by 
it  he  laid  the  foundations  of  a  new  and  consecrated  family 


33 

life ;  by  it  he  has  helped  to  irradiate  ten  thousand  German 
homes  with  the  blessed  sunshine  of  heaven.  And  not  German 
homes  alone,  but  ten  thousand  English  and  American  homes 
as  well ;  for  to  Luther  far  more,  it  seems  to  me,  than  to  any 
other  man,  we  owe  that  reconstruction  of  domestic  life  and 
nurture  in  the  spirit  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  one  of 
the  brightest  glories  of  evangelical  Protestantism.  He  set  the 
example  and  all  the  other  Reformers  followed  in  his  steps. 

(2.)  In  his  Theology.  To  some  it  may  sound  strange  to 
hear  it  said  that  Luther's  sympathy  with  childhood  modified 
his  theology.  Nevertheless,  I  believe  it  was  even  so.  Pectus 
theologum  facit.  A  wise,  loving  heart,  sanctified  by  the  word 
of  God  and  by  prayer,  is  the  best  interpreter  of  Scripture. 
What  did  more  than  aught  else,  perhaps,  to  make  Calvin 
the  great  theologian  of  the  sixteenth  century,  was  his  profound 
spiritual  insight  and  sagacity ;  in  other  words,  the  depth  of 
his  Christian  experience.  Luther's  Christian  experience,  while 
equally  deep,  was  still  more  varied,  rich,  and  complete ;  it 
touched  whole  spheres  of  humanity  where  Calvin  was  not  at 
home ;  above  all,  the  sphere  of  childhood.  I  doubt  if,  since 
the  days  of  the  apostles,  there  has  been  anything  quite  like 
it.  Run  over  in  thought  the  names  of  the  mighty  heroes  of 
faith,  who  from  age  to  age  have  fought  the  battles  of  truth, 
and  tell  me  which  of  them  in  this  respect  can  we  place  beside 
Luther's  ? 

But  how  did  his  sympathy  with  childhood  modify  his 
theology  ?  By  the  sweet  Christological  tone  which  was  thus 
infused  into  it ;  or,  perhaps,  I  should  rather  say,  by  the  posi- 
tion assigned  in  it  to  the  infant  Redeemer.  Luther  grasped 
the  central  truth  of  the  incarnation  with  astonishing  energy  of 
conviction  ;  his  whole  faith  rested  upon  it ;  and  more  than 
any  other  theologian  of  the  Reformation,  he  recognized  and 
adored  God  incarnate  in  the  Babe  of  Bethlehem,  as  really  as 
in  the  crucified  and  risen  Jesus.  He  was  both  impelled  and 
enabled  to  do  this  by  the  fine  mystic  quality  of  his  piety, 
which  helped  to  keep  him  alike  untrammeled  by  the  abstract 


34 

formulas  of  sacred  doctrine,  and  undisturbed  by  contradictions 
of  the  mere  intellect.  His  conception  of  the  word  made  flesh 
for  us  men  and  for  our  salvation  embraced  not  only  the  whole 
Christ  in  His  entire  incarnate  life  and  work,  from  the  cradle  to 
the  cross,  and  from  the  cross  to  the  throne  in  glory  ;  but  Christ 
also  as  the  same  yesterday,  to-day  and  forever.  I  will  give  a 
single  illustration  of  my  meaning  by  quoting  a  part  of  Luther's 
letter  to  his  wife,  ''doctoress  and  self-tormentor  at  Wittenberg," 
as  he  calls  her,  written  from  Eislebeu  on  the  Tth  of  February, 
1546,  eleven  days  before  his  death.  Having  wished  her  grace 
and  peace  in  the  Lord,  and  exhorted  her  to  read  the  Gospel  of 
John  and  the  Smaller  Catechism,  he  playfully  takes  her  to  task 
for  being  so  anxious  about  him.  "For  thou  must  needs  take 
the  care  of  thy  God  upon  thee,  just  as  though  He  were  not 
almighty,  and  could  not  create  ten  Doctor  Martins,  if  the  one 
old  Doctor  Martin  were  drowned  in  the  Saale.  Leave  me  in 
peace  with  thy  cares ;  I  have  a  better  guardian  than  thou  and 
all  the  angels.  He  lies  in  the  ma/ngeT  and  hangs  on  the  hreast 
of  a  virgin^  but  sits  none  the  less  at  the  right  hand  of  God 
the  Father  Almighty.  Therefore  be  at  peace.  Amen."  I  might 
quote  a  score  of  similar  passages,  all  showing  how  deeply 
Luther  felt  the  truth  of  his  own  teaching,  that  if  we  would 
climb  up  to  God,  find  Him,  and  know  Him  as  our  forgiving 
Father,  we  must  begin  at  the  cradle  in  Bethlehem. 

(3.)  In  his  Home.  A  volume  might  be  written  on  this 
point ;  a  few  words  must  suffice.  Luther  had  six  children ; 
three  sons  and  three  daughters.  His  familiar  letters,  his  table- 
talk,  the  reports  of  friends  and  many  passages  in  his  writings 
throw  so  clear  alight  upon  his  domestic  life  that  we  seem  almost 
to  have  seen  it  with  our  own  eyes.  And  contrasted  with  the 
fierce  confiict  that  then  shook  the  world,  and  of  which  the  great 
Reformer  himself  was  the  central  figure,  it  presents  a  picture 
of  household  peace  and  love  that  is  inexj^ressibly  attractive. 
The  halo  of  the  Holy  Child  Jesus  encircles  it.  I  do  not  sup- 
pose there  was  a  sweeter  Christian  home  in  all  the  German 
fatherland  than  that  of  Dr.  Martin  Luther.    Within  its  charmed 


35 

enclosure  the  voice  of  this  son  of  thunder,  whose  echoes  were 
resounding  through  all  Europe,  was  gentle  as  a  woman's ;  here 
the  rough  hand  of  this  dauntless  assailant  of  pope  and  devil, 
became  as  soft  in  touch  as  that  of  a  young  maiden. 

When  Elizabeth,  his  second  child,  died  in  infancy,  he  said  : 
"  My  little  daughter  is  dead.  I  am  surprised  how  sick  at 
heart  she  has  left  me ;  a  woman's  heart,  so  shaken  am  I.  I 
could  not  Iiave  believed  that  a  father's  soul  would  have  been 
so  tender  towards  his  child."  And  when  his  lovely  daughter, 
Madeleine,  sickened  and  died  in  the  14th  year  of  her  age,  the 
frame  of  the  strong  man  shook  like  an  aspen  leaf.  He  would 
approach  her  bed,  and  taking  hold  of  her  small,  thin  hands, 
press  them  again  and  again  to  his  lips.  "  My  dearest  child, 
my  own  sweet  and  good  Madeleine,  I  know  you  would  gladly 
stay  with  your  father  here ;  but  in  heaven  there  is  a  better 
Father  waiting  for  you."  "  Oh,  yes ;  I  have  loved  this  dear 
child  too  much,"  he  exclaimed,  as  he  walked  the  room,  over- 
come with  emotion.  When  the  last  agony  came  on,  he  threw 
himself  on  his  knees  by  her  bedside,  and  weeping  bitterly, 
entreated  God  to  spare  her.  He  held  her  in  his  arms  as  she 
breathed  her  last,  and  then  softly  laying  her  head  upon  the 
pillow,  cried  out  again  and  again :  "  Poor  child  !  thou  hast 
found  a  Father  in  heaven.  Oh,  my  God !  let  thy  will  be 
done !" 

In  Konig's  illustrated  life  of  the  German  Reformer  there 
is  a  picture  which  gives  us  a  glimpse  of  his  home  on  Christmas- 
eve.  The  Christmas  tree  is  blazing,  laden  with  all  sorts  of 
fruit,  horses,  trumpets,  cakes  and  dolls.  Luther  sits  in  the 
midst  and  on  his  lap  kneels  his  youngest  child,  clasping  him 
around  the  neck.  On  his  shoulders,  her  hands  joined  to  his, 
leans  his  Kiithe,  "  meine  heilige,  tiefgelehrte,  gnadige  Haus- 
frau,"  as  he  called  her  in  one  of  his  last  letters  from  Eisleben. 
The  oldest  boy,  Hans,  is  aiming  at  an  apple  on  the  tree  with 
a  crossbow,  Philip  Melancthon  directing  him  how  to  do  it. 
In  another  part  of  the  room  "  cousin  Lehne "  is  showing  a 
picture-book  to  the  second  boy ;  while  the  third  boy  presses 


36 

his  father's  knee  with  one  hand  and  with  the  other  holds  up  in 
triumph  a  hobby-horse.  Madeleine  clasps  in  rapture  the 
little  angel  that  belongs  of  right  to  her  as  the  angel  of  the 
household.  The  picture,  even  if  somewhat  fanciful,  is,  no 
doubt,  a  faithful  representation  of  the  spirit  which  inspired 
that  happy  Wittenberg  home. 

In  his  catechism,  then,  in  his  theology,  and  in  his  home, 
Luther's  sympathy  with  childhood  vividly  appears.  Since  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  I  repeat,  no  great  theologian  or  reformer, 
it  seems  to  me,  has  equalled  him  in  the  power  of  this  sympathy  ; 
and  what  adds  immeasurably  to  its  strength  and  beauty  is 
the  manner  in  which  it  blossoms  forth  out  of  his  adoring  love 
to  the  Infant  Redeemer.  On  this  account,  also,  the  Protestant 
churches  owe  him  a  debt  of  gratitude  that  can  never  be  fully 
paid.  By  example  and  precept  alike  he  taught  them  to  fall 
down  and  worship  the  divine  Babe  in  the  manger.  How  he 
delighted  in  the  gospel  of  the  holy  Nativity !  "  We  cannot  vex 
the  devil  more  than  by  teaching,  preaching,  singing  and  talking 
of  Jesus.  Therefore  I  like  it  well,  when  with  sounding  voice 
we  sing  in  the  church  :  Et  homo  f  actus  est  /  et  verbum  caro 
factum  est.  The  devil  cannot  endure  these  words,  and  flies 
away,  for  he  well  feels  what  is  contained  therein.  Oh,  how 
happy  a  thing  were  it,  did  we  find  as  much  joy  in  these 
words  as  the  devil  is  affrighted  at  them  !" 

GEORGE   L.  PRENTISS. 


VII. 

LUTHER  AS  A  PREACHER. 


In  studying  Luther  as  a  preacher,  the  first  thing  that 
strikes  one  is  thehinnility  with  which  he  shrank  from  the  work 
of  the  pulpit.  He  said  to  liis  Superior  who  was  urging  him 
to  preach :  "  No,  no  ;  it  is  no  slight  thing  to  speak  before  men 
in  the  place  of  God."  Yielding  reluctantly  at  last,  he  said  to 
Staupitz  :  "Ah !  doctor,  by  doing  this  you  deprive  me  of 
life.  I  shall  not  be  able  to  hold  out  three  months."  It  was 
only  the  natural  shrinking  of  a  great  soul  from  a  great 
responsibility.     The  modest  men  are  the  mighty  men. 

He  began  to  preach  in  an  old  wooden  chapel,  30  feet  by 
20.  For  a  beginning  it  was  large  enough  for  a  large  man  ;  it 
was  too  small  for  a  small  man.  The  new  preacher  ''could 
not  be  hid."  The  full  man  had  a  full  church.  After  this 
hesitant  beginning,  almost  every  day  for  weeks  together  Luther 
was  in  the  pulpit.  During  Lent  he  often  preached  twice,  and 
sometimes  thrice  a  day,  besides  keeping  up  his  daily  academi- 
cal lectures.  He  condemned  a  certain  minister  as  luxurious 
and  lazy,  because  on  a  salary  of  about  $200  a  year  he  preached 
only  twice  a  week. 

Luther's  physical  qualifications  for  preaching  were  excep- 
tional. He  had  an  iron  constitution ;  strength,  force  and 
grace.  He  had  a  clear,  ringing,  flexible  voice,  which  could 
be  stirring  as  a  bugle,  or  soothing  as  a  lute.  He  had  such 
eyes  as  magnetize  and  master  men.  He  could  look  through 
his  eyes  and  with  them  ;  they  were  deep  beyond  fathoming  ; 
they  were  quick,  sharp,  piercing ;  they  could  flame  with  pas- 
sionate fierceness,  flash  with  lofty  inspiration,  or  flow  with 
tenderest  tears. 


38 

Luther's  intellectual  qualifications  for  preaching  were 
remarkable  for  their  symmetry  and  comprehensiveness.  It 
would  not  be  difiicult  to  name  one  and  another  preacher  who 
excelled  him  in  one  and  another  respect ;  but  it  would  be 
impossible  to  name  one  who  in  all  respects  was  his  equal. 
Comparing  him  with  other  preachers,  Melancthon  bears  this 
testimony — "  One  is  an  interpreter,  one  a  logician,  another  an 
orator,  affluent  and  beautiful  in  speech,  but  Luther  is  all  in 
all."  If  you  distrust  Melancthon's  enthusiasm  for  his  friend, 
hear  the  later  and  calmer  verdict  of  Mr.  Froude,  who  says 
of  Luther :  "  In  mother  wit,  in  elasticity,  in  force  and  imag- 
inative power,  he  was  as  able  a  man  as  ever  lived."  Like  all 
great  preachers  Luther  was  mighty  in  the  Scriptures.  He 
found  in  the  Bible  his  food  and  his  drink ;  his  life  and  his 
light ;  his  tools  and  his  weapons.  He  was  always  a  student, 
but  always  with  his  eye  upon  duty  as  well  as  upon  truth, 
upon  man  as  well  as  upon  God. 

Of  Luther's  spiritual  qualifications  for  preaching  it 
would  be  difficult  to  say  enough.  He  was  greatly  affected 
by  the  spirituality  and  fervor  of  the  sermons  of  Tauler. 
His  religious  experiences  were  extraordinary  in  depth  and 
in  vividness.  He  lived  under  the  spell  of  the  infinities 
and  the  eternities ;  he  heard  the  inaudible ;  he  saw  the 
invisible ;  he  handled  the  intangible ;  and  so,  according 
to  the  old  proverb,  "he  turned  men's  ears  into  eyes."  ^Vhen 
charged  with  harshness  and  severity  he  said  :  "  I  can  easily 
cut  a  willow  or  a  hazel  wand  with  my  trencher-knife,  but  for 
a  hard  oak  a  man  must  use  the  axe."  He  was  master  of 
different  metliods ;  he  knew  how  to  fence  and  how  to  strike 
hard  blows ;  he  could  wield  either  a  Damascus  blade,  or  a 
battle-axe.  Heine  says :  "•  He  was  not  only  the  tongue,  but 
the  sword  of  his  time.  Sometimes  he  was  wild  as  the  storm 
that  uproots  the  oak,  and  then  again  he  was  gentle  as  the 
zephyr  that  dallies  with  the  violet."  He  knew  his  times.  He 
did  not  preach  classical  sermons,  mediaeval  sermons,  or  lt)tli 
century  sermons;  but  such  as  were  precisely  suited  to  his  own 


39 

day.  With  keen,  longing  eyes  he  looked  into  tlie  present, 
and  aimed  his  sermons,  not  at  graves,  nor  at  clonds,  but  at 
living  men.  Behind  and  in  every  sermon  was  the  man,  full 
of  faith,  full  of  power,  full  of  tenderness  and  sympathy  ;  and 
his  great  true  heart  pulsed  in  every  word  he  uttered.  He 
knew  well  how  to  choose  his  language.  He  could  utter  words 
that  would  toll  on  and  on,  and  thrill  the  world  with  their 
music  like  a  new  evangel.  He  could  speak  words  that  went 
like  bullets  swift  and  straight  to  their  mark  ;  or  such  as  burst 
like  shells  amid  his  foes.  Hot,  hissing  words  he  had  for  those 
who  merited  his  scorn  ;  or  gentle,  drawing,  sootliing  words 
for  those  who  needed  persuading  or  comforting. 

In  this  great  preacher,  as  in  all  who  fill  the  pulpit  and 
lift  the  people,  self  was  subordinated  and  Christ  was  supreme. 
He  said  :  "  My  true  disciples  do  not  believe  in  Luther  but  in 
Jesus  Christ."  At  the  gates  of  Wittenberg,  starting  on  foot 
on  his  perilous  journey  to  Augsburg,  when  the  crowd  of  his 
friends  (assembled  to  bid  him  farewell)  shouted:  "Luther 
forever,"  he  replied:  "Christ  forever!"  Again  he  said: 
"  Those  are  my  best  friends  who  think  the  worst  of  me. 
I  cannot  allow  myself  to  be  praised  either  by  you  or  by  any 
man,  for  all  praise  of  man  is  vain,  and  only  that  which  comes 
from  God  is  true."  In  his  preaching  he  was  to  the  last  degree 
simple.  He  said  :  "  I  want  the  common  people  and  children 
and  servants  to  understand  me."  And  again  he  said : 
"  Cursed  are  all  preachers  that  in  church  aim  at  high  or  hard 
things."  He  was  as  diligent  as  he  was  versatile.  The  pro- 
digious task  of  translating  the  Scriptures  he  accomplished 
mainly  by  economizing  fragments  of  time.  To  a  friend,  who 
wondered  how  he  had  achieved  so  great  a  work,  his  explana- 
tion was  this  paraphrase  of  Apelles'  familiar  motto  :  '"''Nulla 
dies  sine  versu  /"  He  knew  that  religion  must  sing  as  well 
as  work  its  way  among  men,  and  so  he  gave  to  the  nation 
that  had  been  silent  and  songless  in  its  worship  for  centuries, 
hymns  and  tunes  which  were  seized  with  avidity,  and  which 
are  still  full  of  life  and  power. 


40 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  Luther  was  a  bold,  brave 
preacher.  He  was  afraid  of  neither  man  nor  devil.  "When 
the  gallant  Ulrich  Yon  Hiitten  offered  military  aid  for  his 
protection,  Luther  replied  :  "  By  the  Word  the  world  has  been 
conquered ;  by  the  Word  the  Church  has  been  saved  ;  by  the 
Word,  too,  she  will  be  restored.  I  do  not  despise  your  offers ; 
but  I  will  not  lean  upon  any  one  but  Christ."  Pope,  cardinal 
and  emperor  were  to  him  only  men.  He  would  smite  hypocrisy 
squarely  in  the  face,  whether  crowned  or  uncrowned.  Well 
miglit  Carlyle  say  of  him :  "  His  was  the  bravest  heart  then 
living." 

I  conclude  with  Luther's  favorite  homiletical  rule :  "  Open 

the    mouth   boldly ;    open    the    mouth    widely ;    have    done 

quickly  y 

THOMAS  S.  HASTINGS. 


Date  Due 

•^aflii^^ 

. 

^ 

1 

m 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

PAMPHLET  BINDER 

■■  Syracuse,  N.   Y. 
Stockton,  Calif. 


'* 


BW2222.U58 

A  symposiac  on  Martin  Luther 

Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00030  7084 


